Ex-prez Carter works against US interests

Posted by: ST on March 3, 2006 at 10:20 pm

And doing his level best to undermine the President at every turn. Via the NYSun:

President Carter personally called Secretary of State Rice to try to convince her to reverse her U.N. ambassador’s position on changes to the U.N. Human Rights Commission, the former president recalled yesterday in a talk in which he also criticized President Bush’s Christian bona fides and misstated past American policies on Israel.

Mr. Carter said he made a personal promise to ambassadors from Egypt, Pakistan, and Cuba on the U.N. change issue that was undermined by America’s ambassador, John Bolton. “My hope is that when the vote is taken,” he told the Council on Foreign Relations, “the other members will outvote the United States.”

While other former presidents have tried to refrain from attacking the sitting chief executive, Mr. Carter’s attacks on President Bush have increased. The episode he recounted yesterday showed how he tried to undermine officials at lower levels in an effort to influence policy.

The story, as Mr. Carter recalled, began with a recent dinner for 17 he attended in New York, where the guests included the president of the U.N. General Assembly, Jan Eliasson; an unidentified American representative, and other U.N. ambassadors from “powerful” countries at Turtle Bay, of which he mentioned only three: Cuba, Egypt, and Pakistan. The topic was the ongoing negotiations on an attempt to replace the widely discredited Geneva-based Human Rights Commission with a more accountable Human Rights Council.

“One of the things I assured them of was that the United States was not going to dominate all the other nations of the world in the Human Rights Council,” Mr. Carter said. However, on the next day, Mr. Carter said, Mr. Bolton publicly “demanded” that the five permanent members of the Security Council will have permanent seats on the new council as well, “which subverted exactly what I have promised them,” Mr. Carter said.

Jimmy Carter: showing us once again one of many reasons why he was a one term president.

For those of you who are skeptics on NY Sun reporting, here’s the actual transcript of Carter’s remarks. Decision ’08 has posted the relevant portions of the speech.

Just when you think Carter couldn’t get any worse.

Betsy Newmark writes:

Carter has enjoyed a resurgence in popularity as those who oppose Bush, like the Nobel Peace Prize Committee, can have Carter come speak knowing that he can be counted on to bash Bush’s foreign policy.

How about having a forum assessing Carter’s foreign policy from his time as president? I’m sure that there are many lessons we can learn from studying his actions upon the world stage from both his presidency and post-presidency period. And his cultivation of dictators from Yasser Arafat to Kim Jung Il.

Indeed.

Read more via James Joyner, The Political Pit Bull, Sigmund, Carl and Alfred, McQ at QandO, GOP and the City

Related Toldjah So posts:

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Trackbacks

  • Common Sense Political Thought trackbacked with Now this pisses me off!
  • Blue Star Chronicles trackbacked with Has Jimmy Carter had a Brain Scan Lately?
  • 15 Responses to “Ex-prez Carter works against US interests”

    Comments

    1. forest hunter says:

      It’s been said that a bulb burns brightest just before it stops burning at all. I wonder if this is the inverse proportionality part of physics coming onto play, as he continues his railing against America’s best interests. If so, my regards to the surviving members of his family.

      Has he made an appearance with Momhan yet? I understand that your nothing until that happens and then your fate is sealed.

    2. Lorica says:

      Jimmy, please just go away. Take your million plus from your little award, and just go. Do us a favor, and do the world a favor. Retire to some lovely place on the FL/GA border and just start to enjoy life for once in your life. Please – Lorica

    3. steve says:

      Carter has paid penance for being wrong with his foreign policy while he was the President. He supported the Shah of Iran until the bitter end, so the Left took him out. The Republicans had nothing at all to do with his demise. Carter, these days, is right more often than not. His take on Bolton, the UN and the UN commission on Human Rights is correct and bush and Bolten are wrong. Carter is wrong, however, on his support of the ports deal as is bush. But then, bush is wrong on most issues according to the polls. Peace

    4. sanity says:

      BS alert….

      steve say, “Carter, these days, is right more often than not. His take on Bolton, the UN and the UN commission on Human Rights is correct and bush and Bolten are wrong. Carter is wrong, however, on his support of the ports deal as is bush. But then, bush is wrong on most issues according to the polls.”

      I finally figured out who you remind me of steve, the Iraqi ‘disinformation’ minister!

      Carter is more WRONG, just like always. Unless you think Hamas should be supported?

      His take on Bolton? Most democrats were wrong on Bolton, he is single-handedly pushing reform and accountability in the UN.

      Yes President Bush would seem to be wrong most the times with scewed polls. As Baklava pointed out it is not hard ot scew a poll, especially if the majority of the people you ask are Democrats who hate the President in the first place. Wording polls in the worst possible way also does not help.

      Times Uses Skewed Poll to Claim Falling Bush Support – Link

      As for many of the polls on the President, some of the worst are push polls. If your not familiar with them, let this explanation from the National Council on Public Polls (NCPP):

      a telemarketing technique in which telephone calls are used to canvass vast numbers of potential voters, feeding them false and damaging ‘information’ about a candidate under the guise of taking a poll to see how this ‘information’ affects voter preferences. In fact, the intent is to ‘push’ the voters away from one candidate and toward the opposing candidate. This is clearly political telemarketing, using innuendo and, in many cases, clearly false information to influence voters; there is no intent to conduct research.

      This definition closely matches those used by the American Association of Public Opinion Research (AAPOR) in its 1996 “Statement Condemning Push Polls,” the American Association of Political Consultants (AAPC) in its June 1996 Declaration Regarding So-Called ‘Push Polling’,” and the Council of Marketing and Opinion Research’s (CMOR) statements on “Political Telemarketing vs. Legitimate Polls and Surveys” and “Defining Political Telemarketing” of February 1999. Each organization has its own variations and additions.

      Link

      “Push questions” are widely used throughout the research industry, whereas push polling is not. Push questions — as opposed to so-called “push polling” — are recognized by all the major associations and leading political consultants as a valid and legitimate research tool for the purposes of testing ad messages and examining the collective viewpoints of electorate subgroups.

      Political analyst Charlie Cook recently observed that “‘Push questions’ are asked containing attacks on the candidate sponsoring the poll, to test how vulnerable that candidate may be against anticipated attacks from the other party. These are not only legitimate tools of survey research, but any political pollster who did not use them would be doing their clients a real disservice.”

      The problem is that the questions used in push polls often sound similar to those used as push questions to test campaign messages in legitimate polls. This is done intentionally to camouflage the true nature of the push poll. As a result, many respondents who are interviewed, opponents who are attacked or journalists covering the race in question often lump push questions and “push polling” together in the same category. Today, pollsters are often accused of conducting push polling when they are, in fact, conducting legitimate research.

      Consequences of “Pushing”

      Many researchers and interviewing services don’t have such high-caliber support. Often they are trapped between the need to remain silent to maintain client confidentiality and the need to respond to having their good reputations dragged through the mud. The effect on their staff, operations and other business relationships can be devastating.

      In the past four years, the research industry has been hounded in different states by various legislators and civic groups seeking to restrict telephone contacts for both research and political telemarketing. Experiences with push polling are cited as the reason for this legislative hazing. Should any of this legislation ever pass, the mandatory disclosure statements will severely bias the quality of data that can be collected.

      The blurring of push polling definitions by media and campaigns also does little to improve today’s declining response rates.

      Many of the polls are push-questions that lead the polled person to a set of answers the poller is looking to get.

      That is why not alot of faith is put in polling anymore as it seems to get worse and worse. very few polls give an accurate polling of what people think because of push polls and push questions.

    5. Evon says:

      I voted for Jimmy Carter twice, I’m embarrassed to say. [I was upset with Ford’s pardon of Nixon distrusted Reagan.] Carter once was on my list of heroes. No more. He is a bitter old man who is willing to work against America if he thinks it will hurt Republicans. I’m so disappointed in him.

    6. steve says:

      Who needs a poll? All you need to do is to talk to the people you meet throughout the day to know that bush is not well liked. Unless, of course, you live in an echo chamber. Peace

    7. forest hunter says:

      :^o Carter a man among uh…..This public service announcement has been brought to you by the skewed, the few, the disinherited devoid of factual interpretation l-)

      Unfortunately, the MSM only encourages this kind of abuse. :-@

    8. Lorica says:

      The other day I was called and asked to take a poll. The person polling me said it would take 5 to 10 minutes to take this poll. I said sure, that’s not a problem. He asked me a question about abortion, to which I answered yes I am pro-life. He said “Thank you for your time”. I thought damn that is the fastest 10 minutes in my entire life. Liberals and polls can’t they see that we see thru their partisan ways – Lorica

      Ohhh Steve why are you in one post suggesting polls have some meaning, but in your next saying they don’t matter??? Come on man stay focused. Most people love Bush, or at least in Nov. ’04 more people loved him then your buddy Kerry. Also what you miss is with only 27% Republicans being polled, how did Bush get 34% approval rating??? Seems like 7% of Dems out there love him too. So you must be living in an echo chamber, but who on this site didn’t know that already.

    9. steve says:

      For all of you who have not seen a President being asked to leave office before, the events of the last few weeks must be startling. The Power behind bush have told him that the game is up and it’s time for him to be moving along. That is why one day you’ll be told that Cheney will leave after the 2006 elections and on the next day Chertoff is going to be axed. There is now speculation that Rove has been told to find another job. It’s over folks, hope your not too invested in this clown. Peace

    10. sanity says:

      Hmmm steves fantasy…..

      That is why one day….

      There is now speculation….

      Yes there is always “speculation” in kos and the DU. They cannot come up with any real answers or solutions, so all they have is speculations and fantasies.

      I have a question, and lets go off the deep end and say President Bush is removed and everyone is removed all the way till you get to a Democrat, and you can finally get someone in there for the Democrats…..what then?

      Have the Democrats even got a plan?

      Besides hate bush, impeach bush, smear bush?

      Funny thing is, when you do this over and over again, joe public gets real tired of hearing about it from the Democrats. When everything that comes out of the Democrat party is nothing but negative people get fed up with it and stop listening.

    11. andrew says:

      “How about having a forum assessing Carter’s foreign policy from his time as president? I’m sure that there are many lessons we can learn from studying his actions upon the world stage from both his presidency and post-presidency period.”

      Yes. Don’t fund afghani mujahhedin. Better to have a modernizing, secular, socialist government there.

    12. – The problem the Dhimmybulbs have is that, although according to Gallup Bushes approval rating is sitting at 42%, when the polling question is: “Do you believe the Democrats offer better alternatives to the Republicans in running the country?”, the desperate Dems are sitting at 31%. If you were wondering why the skewed polling is showing Bushes favorability rating at 32%, now you know why. Desperate manipulation, trying hard to level the playing field close to elections. Not a winning formula.

      – Thats why the Liberalcrats are making so much noise about the skewed polls, purposeful propaganda generated by the left-wing media currently making the rounds. Divert attention from their cut and run, weak on defense, obstructionist, out of mainstream, no party plan PR disaster.

      – Personally I’m happy we have a President who doesn’t respond to polls when making his decisions. I can’t think of a better reason for rejecting a party that wants to do things that way. Particularly when everyone knows how much they intentionally lie to garner the results they’re after. Thats not in anyway a sign of leadership qualities, but more like juveniles trying to steal hub caps. Good luck with that moonies.

      – Bang **==